If the Supreme Court has followed long standing tradition, the preliminary decision as to the Constitutionality of the ObamaCare individual mandate and perhaps the fate of the law itself was known to the Justices on Friday of last week.

After oral arguments it is common practice for the Justices to meet Friday morning in a conference room where each Justice votes on the case, beginning with the Chief Justice and proceeding according to seniority. Shortly thereafter Justices will be assigned the writing of majority and minority opinions and comment on various case issues. Decisions can change over the months until presentation of the final ruling, which in the case of ObamaCare will probably be sometime in late June. (1)

Whatever happened Friday morning, its a safe bet Barack Hussein Obama was the 10th person to know, having undoubtedly received a call from Elena Kagan minutes after the meeting ended.

What will be Obamas stagecraft between now and the day the Court makes its decision known to the rest of us?

Many political pundits believe Obamas chances for re-election will be seriously impaired if the Court should find his signature power grab unconstitutional. But dont believe it.

As was made obvious by his cynical race baiting in the Trayvon Martin affair, Obama is...

Obummer and his crew know that they are screwed. His best
chance is to try to strong arm another one or two. That way they can claim in the fall that it was a Conservative/radical right wing court that over reached and screwed all the parasites of free stuff.

He'll probably expedite pushing out more of the goodies, so that when it's all jerked away it will be more dramatic. He'll also be doing an in depth side-by-side comparison with Romneycare to shut the Republicans up on the debate in general.

5
posted on 04/03/2012 10:31:19 AM PDT
by throwback
(The object of opening the mind, is as of opening the mouth, is to shut it again on something solid.)

This issue is the dividing line of the era. Between personal responsibility and the responsibility of the group.

The group already cares for children and the elderly. We also care for the disabled, and make sure that immediate needs for the poor are met.

Now we tread on life decisions for the abled bodied. To what degree are we expected to obtain care for ourselves, provided by the group? We need to left alone in this area and decide / arrange on our own; as a measure of freedom. Unencumbered by having to support others in the group. If medical care is not important to an individual, OK. If it is important, then obtain it. Acute care is available for all. Diagnostic care, not so much.

Funny how this communists King can get any information he wants. Let us try and the communists block is damn near air tight. Try getting his college information or his long form birth certificate. It is amazing how strong the communists are in America. Takes years of efforts to get anything.

However, if it's upheld, then I think that Kennedy and Scalia would be the ones to join the 4 libs. Here's one of Scalia's quotes from 1/2011:

Persuade your fellow citizens it's a good idea and pass a law. That's what democracy is all about. It's not about nine superannuated judges who have been there too long, imposing these demands on society.

I have to keep explaining that one to my favorite Leftist. Yes, the concept was introduced by the Right - as bait. The idea was to give the Left something which matched exactly what they were asking for, forcing them to admit that what they were asking for wasn't what they were trying to get. An effective, if risky, idea.

I have to keep explaining that one to my favorite Leftist. Yes, the concept was introduced by the Right - as bait. The idea was to give the Left something which matched exactly what they were asking for, forcing them to admit that what they were asking for wasn't what they were trying to get. An effective, if risky, rhetorical technique.

Can somebody, anybody answer the question I have been asking for two and half years now, with ZERO results: “Why was this massive monstrosity needed when we already had HIPAA (Portability) and CHIPRA (child insurance)?” Both are funded through 2013.

To put it in the kindest terms possible, 0bambi is a f’n liar.

15
posted on 04/03/2012 10:53:48 AM PDT
by NTHockey
(Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)

What I really want is a very narrow decision written by a slim majority that absolutely curtails the idea of the commerce clause regulating everyday life. I want a rollback of all these stupid decisions that have been made by the court trying desperately to accommodation an exception. The law is supposed to cover the rule, NOT the exception. It is up to the sane and level headed minds to recognize when an exception exists, and pass the law by.

Worst case is that the court comes back with ‘this is a tax’ and dances around a bit. Because simply put, the easiest way to sidestep this whole arena is raise taxes by 5k a person and give a ‘tax credit’ of five thousand to everyone who complies with the buying of health insurance.

Yes, it's a backdoor mandate, but a lot harder to challenge that Congress’ power of making tax breaks.

I want the unequivocal, even if by the slimmest of majorities, ruling that specifically slams Congress for overstepping their bounds and limiting the commerce clause.

16
posted on 04/03/2012 10:55:18 AM PDT
by kingu
(Everything starts with slashing the size and scope of the federal government.)

If POTUS knows the vote and it was favorable, it would have been the height of lunacy to “politicize” the decision by saying what he did. The most sensible course of action would have been to keep his mouth shut.

Thus, either he knows the vote was against him or he was preemptively trying to steer votes without knowing how people were inclined to vote. But the problem with the latter interpretation is that POTUS was silent all last week. If he wanted to preemptively steer votes, the best time to have done so would have been in advance of Friday’s vote. Even he has to know that any justice who changes their mind on this momentous issue is going to look foolish or craven. Thus, if the goal was to “steer” their thinking, it was best to do so before they committed to a vote since once that vote is cast, it will be much harder to justify changing it.

In light of the foregoing, I’d put the odds that he knows the vote at better than 4:1.

Even before Barack Hussein Obama was “sworn in” (yeah, THAT flub-a-dub production) he immediately began his relentless “march of destruction” across the Constitution, with apparent deceit and malice aforethought. “Keep ‘em confused” seems to be his method. - He’s a bizzy, bizzy, little wannabe ruler. - If he loses the election, look for a doozy of a temper tantrum and a level of fit throwing the likes of which you cannot imagine in your wildest dreams. Inciting riots? Hope not; but who knows what he will do in the wake of what he has already done to divide this country?

I will admit, that dude can read that teleprompter, and Speech 101 taught him well not to make a hissing sound with his “s’s” at the end of his words. - His regime tenure has been the most EXHAUSTING, DEPRESSING, OPPRESSIVE, TIRESOME, DISCOURAGING, YOU NAME IT, ever, in the history of this country.

All the Republican politicians the Party had to choose from as an opponent for Hussein in November and they pick friggin’ Willard Romney, the ORIGINATOR of the most hated damned thing Obama has done during his Regime!!!!

Now THAT is a perfect example of the mind of the Republican Party—nominate the guy whose TURN it is, or the guy who has done the most FAVORS for Party leaders. In short, the MOST POPULAR DC insider with the Party elites.

Can somebody, anybody answer the question I have been asking for two and half years now, with ZERO results: Why was this massive monstrosity needed when we already had HIPAA (Portability) and CHIPRA (child insurance)? Both are funded through 2013...because the real aim is not to provide medical care by having insurance companies pay for it, but to provide medical care by having the government pay for it - this will be accomplished by saddling the insurance companies with such expensive requirements as no limits on coverage and forced enrollment of those with pre-existing conditions, to the point that, there really being no Santa Claus, they will have to charge such high premiums that eventually very few will be able to pay and will finally go out of business - then of course your benevolent government will step in to save the day - probably by 2020 at the latest......

I realize that is the real reason for DeathCare; however, the question I REALLY wanted to get answered was the coverage was there with HIPAA & CHIPRA, so why add another program. Perhaps your response is why no politician will answer the question.

On another note, why are we spending money on both DeathCare AND HIPAA + CHIPRA? Money we don’t have.

28
posted on 04/03/2012 1:53:48 PM PDT
by NTHockey
(Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)

America better wake up and realize their country is being driven into bankruptcy by scumbag politicians. We don’t even have the money to cover half of the current bunch of entitlements the government promised to people. Where do the supporters of this bill expect the trillions of dollars to come from to pay for it? Too many Americans have faith in this corrupt government and too many believe in a free lunch.

29
posted on 04/03/2012 3:14:19 PM PDT
by peeps36
(America is being destroyed by filthy traitors in the political establishment)

Rush is saying this same thing right now, that O knew the internal vote.

In reading various analyses of the 3 days hearings, I also got the impression it would not be 5-4 but more like 6-3 or 7-2, or .. wouldnt it be ironice? ... 9=0.

In the case of the latter, I suspect that AJ Kagan would have finally done the right thing, if only to cover her ample posterior, and abstained from voting, a last second recusal, if you will, thus 8-0...

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.